Results 61 to 70 of 93
-
10-30-2018 #61
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
Rights shouldn't be determined whether you look like a saint or you look like a bum. Nor should dress, or demeanor should invalidate a person's rights. If the determination of rights is based on perception then we would have a lot more trouble. The problem is people are grasping with the expansion of rights. In this country at it's creation not everyone had equal rights. Over the course of it's history, rights have been increased since we understand people come from all sorts of backgrounds. It has not always been a smooth transition, but nonetheless were have slowly going in the right direction. The question you raise is what does society look like and it looks like us. All of it, not a certain sector not a certain group. Not a person wearing a suit, or dressed in tatter clothes, or simply physical features should be limiting. If you can accept that then you realize that this community is not limited to certain, race, gender, ethnic....etc. It wasn't too long ago the doctrine of separate, but equal was normal. The problem I have with your arguments hear is determination of who should have rights or whose rights should be respected. That's not how it works. Inalienable rights, should not and is not easily disregarded regardless of who the person is or how they act.
Well this will be a long discussion.
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
-
10-30-2018 #62
-
10-30-2018 #63
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
Doesn't have to be, unless you're trying to convince me of something. I'll tell you the same thing I've always told Stavros - you're an idealist. Everyone starts life as an idealist. But at a certain point, those of us who have been successful have transitioned to reality over idealism.
Wrong. That's exactly how it works. How it SHOULD work is that all your inalienable rights will always be respected, no matter what you do or how you look. But how it EXACTLY works is, your rights will be respected as long as you yourself are respectful of everyone else, including their dearly-held beliefs and deep-seeded fears. There's an old saying, "You have to give respect to get respect." No truer words were ever spoken.
We could go back and forth about how things should be as opposed to how things are, Life. The disparity exemplifies the overriding difference between conservatism and liberalism. Now that IS a long conversation.
3 out of 4 members liked this post.We are number one. All others are number two or lower.
-
10-30-2018 #64
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
It is not idealism or realism with regards to protecting and enforcing the rights of others. Rights on paper are only effective when we as society seek to enforce them. Saying "that's the way it is," is nothing more than an excuse to keep the prevailing system. The old saying Freedom isn't free, is true in that one must fight to remain free, not merely saying your free means you are free. We must as a society seek to ensure people have their rights. Who we are we expecting to enforce it? It's our responsibility and no one's else.
2 out of 3 members liked this post.
-
10-30-2018 #65
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
Have you ever voted before??
Every election in the USA is one person, one vote. Yes, we do elect representatives who go to Congress to advocate for our interests, but the principle is still the same.
So in fact, we were meant to be led by 'mob rule', i.e., democratic control.
Research the history of the electoral college. It was indeed intended to give slave states greater representation in Congress and has nothing at all to do with strengthening our democracy.
A state with 500 people should not be able to dictate policy to a state with 500K citizens.
That's just common sense.
Our entire political system is entirely upside down and ripe for an autocrat to take over.
Be careful of the totems you're hoisting, only the the super rich consider one person/one vote 'mob rule' and somehow un-democratic.
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
-
10-30-2018 #66
- Join Date
- Oct 2008
- Posts
- 878
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
not to be rude but extra civil rights would you get? people are getting fired and banned for political views and religion and your shocked ?
-
10-30-2018 #67
- Join Date
- Feb 2008
- Posts
- 4,426
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
I think there is some confusion between processes that aren't democratic in order to further federalist principles and those that are not democratic to protect against "mob rule". I could be wrong, but I believe that we have a bicameral legislature in part as a concession to our federalist structure which divides power between states and the federal government. In the house citizens' votes matter and in the senate the states are represented. This bicameral structure is a bit of a compromise even though states are helping elect federal representatives for our legislature.
In general, when people talk about the design of anti-majoritarian institutions they tend to think of them as a bulwark against the "tyranny of the majority". The Judiciary does this because they can strike down laws that violate certain Constitutional principles no matter how popular they are and Judges are appointed rather than elected. The structure of the Senate does not really protect against a tyranny of the majority but does ensure that less populous states can have a bit more influence in our legislative process.
I think the electoral college does nothing to protect against a tyranny of the majority but does do something to re-distribute power from citizens in more populous states to those in less populous states. The action of a faithless elector could protect us against the will of the people but historically that has not been done, it is illegal in some states, and there are no standards for doing it (in my view Trump was a great test case; if not then when?).
It doesn't make great sense for a unitary executive for the federal government to be elected by anything other than the will of the citizens he or she represents. As Trish indicated on the previous page, who does the President represent?
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
-
10-30-2018 #68
- Join Date
- Apr 2010
- Posts
- 3,420
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
Yes, it's may be true that the political spectrum is more like a horseshoe, with the extremes being closer to each other than to the centre. Anti-immigrant and anti-globalist views have a long tradition on the left as well as the right. Still, it's odd to see a socialist cheering on people who are anti-government and anti-egalitarian.
1 out of 1 members liked this post.Last edited by filghy2; 10-30-2018 at 09:35 PM.
-
10-30-2018 #69
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
Freedom = Money, Lifester, always has. Money makes you free. Free to travel, free to invent, free to seek romance, free to buy what you want and do as you will. It even, to some extent, makes you above the law - you can always take a chance on doing anything you're sure you can buy your way out of; which pretty much means any minor misdemeanor results in an hour in jail.
So young people should be securing funds. Period. If they can see the forest in front of them, all they have to do is stay on the path laid out clearly before them, stay clean, stay focused, take good counsel, and by the age of 30 you can quite easily be rich in this country, and free as a bird. But you have to earn it.
Plan B, of course, is to start doing whatever you want the second you leave your parents' house, party away your 20's, and find yourself deeply in debt and strangely lacking in job skills by age 30, weakly attaching yourself to any so-called "movement" that lets you blame your problems on circumstances beyond your control. The choice is yours, and everyone else's.
But make no mistake, the whiners and the malcontents, the poorly-adjusted and the neglected, the professional victims and the bleeding-heart pontificators, are all people who followed Plan B, AKA the Democratic Party.
4 out of 5 members liked this post.We are number one. All others are number two or lower.
-
10-30-2018 #70
Re: Revoking Transgender Civil Rights
Since there is no more response to my initial statements and this begs a different question I will briefly respond. This question you express money equals freedom is something I have had numerous discussions about with people all on the political spectrums. It tends to go mostly no where, but I will say this money while it appears to be freedom is not in of itself freedom. I use to argue with my father, what is better connections/power or wealth. I would state that wealth is important, but he kindly remind me that money can only go so far. Furthermore, it takes a few things for your wealth no matter how well planned to be eradicated or brought low. Political views are not be solely based on income. It always makes me laugh when people think Wall Street is mostly Republican, because there is a ton of very very powerful Democrats in Wall Street.
Again this really doesn't go to the issue of rights. This is more of side discussion and it does not address the main issue of rights. We are only strong when we protect the rights of the weak.
2 out of 2 members liked this post.
Similar Threads
-
Vice President Biden: Transgender Discrimination the "Civil Rights Issue of our Time"
By dominic.perron in forum The HungAngels ForumReplies: 6Last Post: 11-01-2012, 08:56 AM -
Security or Civil Rights
By african1 in forum The HungAngels ForumReplies: 6Last Post: 11-17-2010, 09:21 AM -
Obama Signs The First Piece Of LGBT Civil Rights Legilation
By AllanahStarrNYC in forum The HungAngels ForumReplies: 16Last Post: 10-29-2009, 11:01 AM -
Civil Rights Leader Charged With Incest(AP)
By White_Male_Canada in forum Politics and ReligionReplies: 0Last Post: 06-10-2007, 07:25 PM -
Some don't see gay rights as civil rights
By Legend in forum The HungAngels ForumReplies: 16Last Post: 03-08-2007, 06:22 AM